The Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United Nations Conference
on Sustainable Development

Seoul, 19-20 October 2011

Report of the Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory
Meeting for the United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development

I. Matters Calling for Action by the Secretariat or Brought
to Its Attention

1. The Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD, or Rio+20)
adopted the Report of the Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for
UNCSD and agreed to provide the Seoul Outcome of the Meeting as an input
to the UNCSD.

II. Proceedings of the Meeting

A. Sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific: Key challenges
and opportunities

2. Under agenda item four on Sustainable Development in Asia and the
Pacific, the Secretariat provided an overview of the programme for the
Meeting and procedures, followed by reports from a number of subregional,
regional and global meetings related to the UNCSD.

a) H.E. Mr. Fa?amoetauloa Taito Faale Tumaalii, Minister of State,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Samoa, presented the
outcomes of the Rio+20 Pacific Preparatory Meeting: Joint Ministerial
Meeting, held 20-22 July 2011 in Apia, Samoa. His Excellency reported that
the Pacific Meeting adopted the ?Green economy in a blue world? theme for
Rio+20 to reflect that the smallness and isolation of the Pacific population
does not allow sufficient human capacity to build resilience. Thus, capacity-
building remains a key issue for sustainable development and the management
of the global commons of the world?s largest ocean. Small Island Developing
Countries need additional and considerable external financing and seek
agreements with the international community to improve access to funds.

b) Mr. Kilaparti Ramakrishna, Director of the United Nations Economic
and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) Subregional Office
for East and North-East Asia, presented the outcome of the Sixteenth Senior
Officials Meeting of the North-East Asian Subregional Programme for
Environmental Cooperation (NEASPEC), which was held 1-2 September
2011 in Seoul, Republic of Korea. The Meeting of the North-East Asian
countries discussed the need to reinforce political commitment to sustainable
development. Countries in North-East Asia expressed the view that the
Rio+20 should have a concise political declaration and a focused political
document on its two themes that provide meaningful insights to formulating
international development goals after 2015 with a vision for sustainable
development. The Meeting also heard the views of member States on the
issues of ?the principle of common but differentiated responsibility?, ?human
security? and ?green protectionism? with regard to the global discussion on a
green economy.

c) Mr. Yifan La, Deputy Director-General of the Department of
International Organizations and Conferences, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
China, provided an overview of the High-Level Symposium on the United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held 8-9 September 2011 in
Beijing, China. Mr. La expressed that Rio+20 should be action-oriented and
consensus-based and not renegotiate or retract agreed instruments, principles
and outcomes of major summits on sustainable development. The international
community should make provision for technology, finance and capacity-
building for sustainable development. To facilitate this, renewed political
commitment is essential for increasing the integration of all three pillars of
sustainable development. Mr. La indicated that a green economy could be a
good instrument to achieve sustainable development. Strengthened governance
in all three pillars as well as improved integration among the three pillars is
essential, and the United Nations should continue to play a leading role
towards achieving that goal.

d) Mr. Dana Adyana Kartakusuma, Assistant Minister, Economy and
Sustainable Development, Ministry of Environment, Indonesia, presented the
highlights of the High-Level Dialogue on an Institutional Framework for
Sustainable Development, which was held 19-21 July 2011 in Solo, Indonesia.
The Dialogue produced seven messages: (1) the need for renewed political
commitment for sustainable development and a translation of this commitment
into implementation; (2) the need to ensure that the three pillars of sustainable
development work together; (3) at the international level, the need for an
organization to enhance the integration of sustainable development; (4) at the
national level, the need for more integrated support for national strategies; (5)
the need to strengthen the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP);
(6) the need to review and support sustainable development governance at the
local, national and regional levels; and (7) the need for new and additional
financing to enable implementation for capacity-building and technology
transfer.

e) H.E. Mr. Ruslan Iskanderovich Bultrikov, Deputy Minister of the
Ministry of Environment Protection of the Republic of Kazakhstan, delivered
a presentation on the progress made on the development of the Europe-Asia-
Pacific Green Bridge Partnership Programme of the Astana ?Green Bridge?
Initiative. Based on the Initiative, which was welcomed and endorsed as an
outcome of sixth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in
Asia and the Pacific (MCED-6, in Astana, October 2010), the Green Bridge
Partnership Programme was developed with international partners. The Green
Bridge Partnership Programme was supported by the seventh Environment for
Europe Ministerial Conference (Astana, September 2011) and proposes simple
and practical measures to sustain reforms, create enabling conditions for green
technologies, attract private green investment and transfer successful
experience to interested countries and organizations. The Green Bridge
Partnership Programme is proposed as an effective mechanism for supporting
existing programmes, linking with various sectors of the economy and
encouraging investment through policies and projects. The list of potential
green projects of the Green Bridge Partnership Programme was presented, and
all participating countries and organizations were invited to cooperate in these
projects.

f) Mr. Rajneesh Dube, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment and
Forest, India, presented the outcome of the Delhi Dialogue on Green Economy
and Inclusive Growth, which was held 3-4 October 2011 in New Delhi, India.
Mr. Dube reported that many in the Dialogue considered the principle of
common but differentiated responsibilities to be crucial in the context of
reinvigorating Agenda 21; he acknowledged that poverty eradication is an
important benchmark for green economy policies. The Dialogue reiterated that
there should be recognition of national priorities and conditions that define the
nature of the policies and strategies adopted by each country to green their
economies. There is the need for creating a sustainable development fund at
the global level to enable the transition to a green economy. The Dialogue also
called for a green economy road map, with a tool box of flexible policies,
instruments and best practices.

g) Mr. Sergio Luis Lebedeff Rocha, Minister-Counsellor of the Embassy
of Brazil in Seoul, briefed the Meeting on the status of preparations for the
UNCSD in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and expressed his expectation for active
participation of all government and major group representatives in the
Conference.

3. Key outcomes and recommendations from a number of stakeholder
meetings were presented, as follows:

a) Ms. Chee Yoke Ling, Director of Programmes, Third World Network,
presented a statement from The Road to Rio+20: Charting Our Path, which
was held 17-18 October 2011 in Seoul, Republic of Korea. She indicated that
although the environmental dimension of sustainable development has
remained weak, the economic dimension characterized by market liberalism,
privatization and deregulation has resulted in global financial instability.
Employment and livelihoods, the rights of women, indigenous peoples, youth
and other vulnerable groups have suffered for this. There is concern that the
preparatory process has not sufficiently looked into the gaps over the past 20
years. She emphasized that the focus should be on the integration of the three
pillars of sustainable development rather than on a green economy or green
growth. There is a basic right to natural resources that should be used in a
sustainable manner. Regarding the Institutional Framework for Sustainable
Development, the creation of a Sustainable Development Council at the
General Assembly is recommended, along with strengthening UNEP and
coordinating system-wide reforms.

b) Mr. Bruce McKellar, Chair of the International Council for Science
(ICSU) Regional Committee for Asia and the Pacific, provided an overview of
issues raised during the ICSU-UNESCO Asia Pacific Regional Science and
Technology Workshop in Kuala Lumpur in April 2011. The Workshop
recognized that the continued use of the Earth?s resources and ecosystems in
an unsustainable manner will lead to the situation in which the planet will not
support us, recognized already by the number of people living in extreme
poverty. A green economy coupled with a clear commitment to poverty
reduction is a practical way to achieve sustainable development, for which the
indicators of sustainable development should be fully utilized. With regard to
institutional reform for sustainable development, there is a need to integrate
the environment, society, economics, natural and social sciences and
technology in a holistic manner.

c) Prof. Hironori Hamanaka, Chair of the Board of Directors, Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), summarized the outcomes of the
International Forum for Sustainable Asia and the Pacific, which was held in
July 2011 in Yokohama, Japan. The messages were: resilience is a key factor
for pursuing sustainable development; a green economy is an important
interim milestone for shifting towards sustainable development; and a better
institutional framework for sustainable development is one of the necessary
conditions that supports efforts by all stakeholders at all levels. With regard to
the institutional framework, universal membership for UNEP should be
realized, and there needs to be a strengthening and coordinating of existing
institutions and networks at the regional level.

d) Mr. Paul Lagoy Quintos, Programme Manager, IBON International,
reported on the meeting titled ?Promoting a Transformative Agenda for
Sustainable Development: A Strategy Workshop on Rio+20?, which was held
in August 2011 in Bangkok, Thailand. The outcome ?People?s Statement?
called upon governments and the United Nations system to deliver on the
promises and commitments made at the Rio Summit 20 years ago and asked
that they reaffirm and operationalize the Rio Principles. The participants
expressed concern that the green economy theme chosen for the Rio+20 does
not fully or holistically address the social, economic and ecological challenges
of sustainable development today. Instead, the participants requested
governments to look at people-centred sustainable development that is
supported and promoted by an enabling environment. Regarding the
Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development, Rio+20 should work
towards establishing a broad inclusive multi-stakeholder consultative body or
network that is tasked with supporting the promotion and implementation of
Agenda 21 and Rio+20 resolutions.

e) Ms. Daphne Dolot Roxas, Executive Director and Co-convener, Asian
Women?s Network on Gender and Development, presented the outcome of the
Asian Women?s Forum on Gender Justice and the Green Economy: Special
focus on water, energy and food security, which was held 12-16 September
2011 in Bangkok, Thailand. Key recommendations from this meeting include
the need for recognizing gender inequity and an integration of gender
perspectives in planning, decision-making processes and implementation of
programmes and projects in water, energy and food security. With respect to
these three sectors, the participants called for a rights-based approach to
development and women?s empowerment and that gender mainstreaming must
include sex-disaggregated data, gender analysis, gender action plans,
monitoring and evaluation, gender indicators, gender budget audits and
support to women?s leadership in all levels of decision-making.

4. Statements by representatives of member states, major groups and other
organisations covered the topics of a green economy in the context of poverty
eradication and sustainable development and the institutional framework for
sustainable development and stakeholder perspectives. The highlights of those
statements have been compiled in the Chair?s Summary, attached as annex I to
this report.

B. The Asian and Pacific Regional Outcome on Sustainable Development

5. It was agreed that the ?The Seoul Outcome?, as attached in annex II
would be submitted as an input to the UNCSD.

C. Other matters

6. A number of participants expressed appreciation to the Government of
the Republic of Korea for its generosity in hosting this event. Several
participants also expressed their appreciation to the organizers and partner
organizations for their support in attending the Meeting.

D. Adoption of the report of the Asian and Pacific Regional
Preparatory Meeting

7. The Report of the Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for
UNCSD was adopted on 20 October 2011.

III. Organization of the Regional Preparatory Meeting

A. Opening session

8. The opening session included seven statements from distinguished
speakers, organizers, partners, the host government and the UNCSD
Secretariat.

a) The Secretary-General of the UNCSD Secretariat, Mr. Sha Zukang,
opened the session with an overview of Asia and the Pacific, a region that
represents more than half of humanity and has much to contribute to a
sustainable future, considering its great progress in reducing poverty and
protecting ecosystems. Mr. Sha emphasized that Rio+20 must start with a
reaffirmation of the Rio principles and the need to renew and reinvigorate
political will and commitment. In this connection, he highlighted that a green
economy could be a vehicle for integrating the three pillars of sustainable
development and a way of reinforcing coherence among economic,
environmental and social policies and that the discussion on the institutional
framework for sustainable development has been gaining importance and
interest.

b) Mr. Nessim Ahmad, Director of the Environment and Social
Safeguards Division of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), followed with
remarks as a collaborating partner to the Meeting by stating that almost two
billion people live without proper safe sanitation in Asia and nearly half of
billion have no safe drinking water. Rising food prices place pressure on
Asia?s poor. Mr. Ahmad indicated that green policy measures and new green
market opportunities may increasingly become key drivers for growth in the
region.

c) Mr. Young-woo Park, Regional Director and Representative for Asia
and the Pacific for UNEP, noted the potential for Rio+20 to contribute to the
evolution of sustainable development in a way that recognizes and values
Asian and Pacific assets and priorities. Regarding a green economy, he
remarked that the concept is an instrument to achieve sustainable development
and that a green economy would contribute to income generation, job creation
and poverty reduction. He also noted that to achieve sustainable development,
all three pillars of the Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development?
environment, social and economic?must be mutually supportive and
reinforcing.

d) H.E. Mr. Henri Djombo, Minister of Sustainable Development, Forest
Economics and Environment in the Republic of Congo, presented the
perspectives of the African region in the lead up to the UNCSD and stressed
that the Asia and Pacific region and Africa share a common destiny in the
context of sustainable development, in particular, through Rio+20 and beyond.
He said that Rio+20 should present the opportunity to catalyse a paradigm
shift in growth in the twenty-first century and strengthen cooperation between
industrialized and developing countries to achieve the Millennium
Development Goals.

e) Representing the UNCSD Bureau, Ambassador Kim Sook indicated
that a green economy has particular relevance to the Asia and Pacific region
and can provide an alternative development path for sustainable growth and
environmental protection, which will ultimately contribute to eradicating
poverty. A transition to a green economy requires strengthening strategic
partnerships between developing and industrialized countries and utilizing
public-private partnerships where possible. Institutional mechanisms to
facilitate financial assistance and technology transfer to developing countries
will have a significant impact on the success of Rio+20. In this context,
strengthening the mandate of regional commissions should also be examined.

f) Representing the organizers of the Asian and Pacific Regional
Preparatory Meeting, Mr. Shun-ichi Murata, Deputy Executive Secretary of
ESCAP, highlighted that the region has plenty of home-grown innovative
approaches for supporting the development of a green economy, considering it
had the foresight to adopt a ministerial declaration that identified the need to
shift towards green growth at the fifth Ministerial Conference on Environment
and Development in Asia and the Pacific in 2005. He expressed his
expectation that, based on their rich experiences, Asia and the Pacific can
embrace this unique opportunity to form an effective and powerful regional
voice so that the region can play a key role in the development of a global
partnership for a green economy.

g) Finally, in the keynote speech, the host of the event, H.E. Dr. Yoo
Young-Sook, Minister for Environment of the Republic of Korea, welcomed
the delegates with the perspective that there is a broad consensus that a green
economy can provide an alternative development model by making the
economy work for the environment. Her Excellency emphasized that the
opportunities and benefits of a green economy must be maximized through
effective policies that also promote social equity. She warned that the
transition to a green economy will be a huge challenge for the international
community, which will need to work together to make country-specific models
for building green economies and narrowing the implementation gap.

10. The non-member States of Brazil and the Republic of Congo were also
present.

11. Four members of the UNCSD Secretariat and three of the UNCSD
Bureau were also present.

12. Representatives of the following United Nations bodies and specialized
agencies were present: the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the
United Nations Environment Programme, the United Nations Centre for
Regional Development, the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction, the United Nations Office for Project Service, the United Nations
University and the World Health Organization.

13. Representatives from the following intergovernmental organizations
and other entities also attended: the Asian Development Bank, the Pacific
Islands Forum Secretariat, Global Green Growth Institute, Institute for Global
Environmental Strategies, the International Institute for Sustainable
Development, the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme and the
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme.

14. The following non-governmental organizations and civil society groups
also attended: CropLife Asia, the Global Compact Local Network Korea, the
International Chamber of Commerce, the Honam Petrochemical Corporation,
Korean Metal Workers? Union, the Asia Pacific Network on Food
Sovereignty, the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural
Development, the Indonesian Farmers and Fishers Society Organization, the
Peasant Movement of the Philippines, the World Farmers? Organisation, the
Indigenous Peoples? International Centre for Policy Research and Education,
the Island Sustainability Alliance CIS INC, the City Government of Dipolog
in Zamboanga del Norte Province, the Local Governments for Sustainability
(South Asia), the International Council for Science (ICSU) Regional
Committee for Asia and the Pacific, the ICSU Regional Office for Asia and
the Pacific, the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, Asian
Women?s Network on Gender and Development, the Helena Benitez Global
Forum, Philippine Women?s University, Development Alternatives with
Women for a New Era, the Ecofund, the Women Organizing for Change in
Agriculture and Natural Resource Management, the Environmental Challenge
Organisation (Singapore), the Freedom from Debt Coalition, the Jubilee
South, the Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, the Project
Survival Media, Advocates for Youth, the Tunza Asia Pacific Youth Networks
(UNEP), Youth with a Mission (Samoa), the Action Group on Erosion,
Technology and Concentration, the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on
Population and Development, the Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual
University, the Centre for Environment and Development, the Earth Council
Asia-Pacific Inc., the Forum for Nature Protection, the Greeneration
Indonesia, the Greenovation Hub, the China Civil Climate Action Network,
Greenpeace, the IBON International, the Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies, the International Green Purchasing Network, the Korean Federation
for Environmental Movement, the National Institute for Disaster Prevention,
the Ole Siosiomaga Society, the Stakeholder Forum for Sustainable Future, the
Regional Environmental Center for Central Asia, the World Society for the
Protection of Animals, the Third World Network and the World Wildlife Fund
International.

15. Nineteen observers from various international organizations, institutes,
companies and civil society organizations were also present.

C. Election of officers

16. The Meeting elected the following officers to the Bureau:

a) Chairperson:

H.E. Mr. Yoon Jong-soo (Republic of Korea)

b) Vice-Chairpersons:

Mr. Yifan La (China)

Ms. Anna Klyukhina (Russian Federation)

H.E. Mr. Vijavat Isarabhakdi (Thailand)

Mr. Dana Adyana Kartakusuma (Indonesia)

Mr. Rajneesh Dube (India)

Mr. Golam Kibria (Bangladesh)

H.E. Mr. Ruslan Iskanderovich Bultrikov (Kazakhstan)

Mr. Sangov Odil (Tajikistan)

Ms. Christine Deborah Schweizer (Australia)

H.E. Mr. Fa?amoetaula Taito Faale Tumaalii (Samoa)

Mr. Asif Qayyum Qureshi (Pakistan)

c) Rapporteur:

Mr. Atsushi Suginaka (Japan)

D. Agenda

17. The Meeting adopted the agenda EDD/UNCSD/RPM/1, with a slight
modification to agenda item five:

1. Opening of the Meeting.

2. Election of officers.

3. Adoption of the agenda.

4. Sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific: Key challenges and
opportunities:

(a) Review of the implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme
for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Plan of
Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development (Johannesburg Plan of Implementation) in Asia
and the Pacific;

(b) Green economy in the context of sustainable development and
poverty eradication;

(c) Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development.

5. Asian and Pacific Regional Outcome on Sustainable Development.

6. Other matters.

7. Adoption of the report.

8. Closing of the Meeting.

Annex I

Chair?s Summary

The Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United Nations Conference
on Sustainable Development

19-20 October 2011, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Almost 300 delegates from 39 countries of the Asian and Pacific region met in Seoul to
prepare for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD). This
document presents the summary by the Chair of the Regional Preparatory Meeting of the
range of views expressed during the Meeting. It does not reflect a consensus on any of the
issues discussed.

1. The emerging development challenges were highlighted by many interventions.
The need to change development and economic models to respond to these challenges
and as a way to improve progress on sustainable development and poverty eradication
was noted.

2. At the same time, the diversity of the region?s resource endowments, stages of
development and capacities preclude a universally applicable model of sustainable
development. Many countries in the region are already addressing sustainable
development challenges with different national and subregional policies, strategies,
initiatives and economic instruments related to the green economy. Several are
establishing supportive national institutional frameworks, such as inter-ministerial
committees and working groups. The outcomes of the fifth Ministerial Conference on
Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific (MCED-5, March 2005, Seoul),
which addressed environmentally sustainable economic growth, or green growth, was a
catalyst for many of these initiatives.

3. The shared priorities noted by many delegations included: access to basic needs,
food security and sovereignty, equitable income distribution and the provision of
opportunities for a better life in an inclusive and sustainable way. In relation to natural
resource management, improving the management of marine ecosystems was
highlighted. The challenges of climate change and the need for specific support in this
regard were noted, especially for Small Island Developing States and for farmers. The
priority development areas identified were: harmonizing rapid economic growth with
employment generation and environmental sustainability; promoting sustainable urban
development and transport; enhancing ecological carrying capacity; improving energy
access and resource management for sustainable development; improving water resource
management for sustainable development; and enhancing the resilience of socio-
economic development to climate change and natural disasters.

4. There is a need to make provisions for the technology, financing and capacity-
building that are necessary to support developing countries? efforts to achieve sustainable
development, including through economic transformation. Appropriate technology,
technology cooperation and technology transfer need to be strengthened. Industrialized
countries should take the lead in changing consumption and production patterns and help
developing countries with financial support, technology transfer, capacity-building and
market access. Related comments noted that integrated science (natural, social and
economic) has a fundamental role to play in expanding the knowledge needed for
sustainable development. At the same time, technological solutions alone will not address
all the challenges?changes in social values and practices in addition to technical
solutions will be required.

5. It was acknowledged that to drive the required changes, there is a need for all
stakeholders to be engaged. The international community?s support for creating an
enabling environment for sustainable development, including through a transition to a
green economy, would be required. Support to member States is provided by the
Government of Republic of Korea, and among others, through the Global Green Growth
Institute, the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, the United
Nations Environment Programme, the Asian Development Bank and the United Nations
Development Programme.

6. The outcomes of Rio+20 should include practical measures for achieving
sustainable development and for supporting a transition to a green economy at the global
and national levels. Among the proposals made in this regard were: sustainable
development goals that are linked to the Millennium Development Goals; the adoption of
poverty-reduction goals that support the development of green economy indicators; and
the adoption of sustainable development measures to complement national gross
domestic product-boosting measures. Proposals relating to financing included the
creation of a Sustainable Development Fund, the creation of a Green Economy Fund and
a tax on financial transactions. Other proposals included the establishment of a Green
Economy Clearing House and a Global Partnership on Green Growth as a way to support
poverty eradication and sustainable development.

7. Other comments related to Rio+20 outcomes noted that the Conference should
seek to make progress on food and water security and sustainable energy. A
comprehensive approach should be developed to alleviate the short-term impacts of food
shortages and excessive price volatility on developing countries. Rio+20 should agree to:
increase research on agricultural and marine productivity; improve market access for
farmers through greater trade liberalization and better market infrastructure; and to
improve the coordination among international food security institutions. Rio+20 should
also provide a valuable platform to share sustainable development best practice and
encourage effective governance, including on water management and water-use
efficiency in food production. In addition, Rio+20 should address access to sustainable
energy by seeking to reduce the global energy intensity and expand the level of
renewable energy used in national energy portfolios. It was also noted that knowledge
systems and innovations need to be galvanized.

8. An effective reform of the institutional framework for sustainable development
would also support a just transition to a green economy. When the establishment of a
Sustainable Development Council is discussed, provisions should also be considered for
the participation of major groups? representatives.

9. An objective appraisal of the implementation of sustainable development
commitments and action plans was urged, including identification of areas for further
progress. There were calls for further progress on: strengthening the holistic integration
of the environment, economic and social dimensions of sustainable development;
strengthening national councils for sustainable development; defining post-Kyoto
commitments; implementing the agreed Rio Principles, in particular Rio Principle 10 on
access to information; gender equality, democracy and human rights; regulatory
frameworks for financial markets; recognizing the importance of peoples? participation;
addressing the challenges of the least developed countries and small island States;
providing children and youth with education, training and opportunities; and addressing
child labour and animal welfare.

10. Other areas where the need for further progress was identified included: a
framework for promoting sustainable consumption and production, commitments to
workers? rights and decent jobs; promoting rights-based approaches to development;
participation of major groups in decision-making processes, particularly in relation to the
management of natural resources; the use of gender-disaggregated data; and partnerships
between business and industry, governments and the natural science, social science and
technology communities.

Green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication

11. A green economy was identified as one of the means to achieve sustainable
development, a vehicle for integrating the three pillars of sustainable development and a
way of reinforcing coherence among economic, environmental and social policies. Some
delegations further noted that a green economy was essential for achieving sustainable
development and promoting economic growth for poverty eradication.

12. Although Rio+20 would consider this important theme, several delegations
emphasized the need for Rio+20 to secure a renewed and strengthened political
commitment to sustainable development. Potential confusion regarding the introduction
of a new term to the international development agenda was noted. It was also emphasized
that green economy measures could not substitute for Kyoto protocol commitments.

13. Although it was recognized that there is no consensus on the definition of a green
economy, some common themes were identified: low-carbon growth that delivers
affordable and sustainable energy supplies to households; sustainable consumption and
production; increased resource efficiency; strengthened measures to manage climate
change; sustainable forestry management; sustainable development of mega-cities; the
strengthened environmental health of oceans; resilience to natural disasters; and links
between environmental degradation and the health of people and ecosystems, among
others.

14. A transition to a green economy should follow a people-centred approach and
should be clearly linked to poverty-reduction efforts. Comments in this regard included
the following: a people-centred approach should address the needs of the disadvantaged
and most vulnerable populations; there is a need to recognize human security issues;
there is a need to improve social justice; and partnerships should promote sustainable
development rather than be exploitative and opportunistic.

15. It was emphasized that member States need the flexibility to select those measures
for achieving a green economy that are applicable to their own development contexts and
that green economy options should be fair, open, inclusive, equitable and rules-based.
Applying the theme of ?greening economies? in the ?blue world? context of the Pacific
small island States and countries with a significant fisheries sector and large numbers of
coastal communities requires special focus and attention at Rio+20. This is important not
just for their benefit but for the sake of the globe as a whole, which depends significantly
on the state of the Pacific Ocean and its resources. The ?blue economy? approach reflects
the importance of marine resources and ecosystems as a foundation for sustainable
development, in particular for the many countries for which they are an important source
of food, livelihoods, income and culture.

16. Several interventions emphasized that any transition to a green economy should be
based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibility. Some interventions
also noted that countries should establish regulatory and market-based measures to
facilitate such a transition in a way that mitigates any adverse impacts on the poorest and
most vulnerable populations. This would also include the reform of environmentally
harmful subsidies, such as fossil fuel and fishing subsidies.

17. Several delegations remarked that support provided to developing countries should
be coordinated to promote aid effectiveness and that a transition to a green economy
should not involve the imposition of conditionalities on overseas development aid. In the
context of aid effectiveness, it was noted that there is a need for simplifying climate
change-financing modalities to allow increased access and reduced transaction costs for
developing countries.

18. It was proposed that the systematic exchange of knowledge and best practices for
promoting a green economy should be supported through appropriate mechanisms that
could include establishing knowledge-exchange platforms and centres of excellence in
green technologies and global cooperation in priority sector areas, such as water, energy
and the marine environment. This would also include strengthening global observation
networks to address climate change and natural disasters.

19. The implementation of a green economy must involve all corners of society, down
to the community and individual levels. There were calls for: countries to integrate the
concept of sustainable development into national education curricula; public awareness-
raising campaigns; and for civil society organizations to be included in decision-making
and implementing processes. A role for the private sector in research and development,
technological innovation, investment and support through Corporate social responsibility
programmes was highlighted. There was also a call for the current and potential role of
women in achieving sustainable development to be addressed at Rio+20, including
encouraging full participation of women in economic and political decision-making
processes.

20. The use of unilateral measures that use a green economy and environmental
protection as an obstacle to trade must be avoided. It was proposed that support should be
provided in the form of capacity development and technology transfer to ensure access to
global markets for countries in the region, which is central to achieving a green economy
and sustainable development.

21. The interventions of delegations further noted that a green economy would need
to:

- Be built on sustainable production and consumption patterns and ensuring all
people?s well-being;

- Be implemented in a way that fully engages stakeholders to ensure an inclusive
transition to more sustainable development pathways, including through equitable
access to resources and opportunities for advancement and providing decent work
and ensuring the equitable distribution of benefits;

- Ensure that these approaches are developed and maintained in a way that promotes
a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to economic
growth and sustainable development and does not constitute a means of arbitrary
or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade;

- Secure the necessary investments towards sustainable management of ecosystems,
including through joint management and protection frameworks, such as the Coral
Triangle Initiative and the Pacific Oceanscape framework; at the same time, the
marginalization of communities must be avoided;

- Focus on the development and application of an explicit and supportive
programmatic approach for poverty reduction;

- Mobilize financing from domestic sources in addition to international sources of
financing, including by reducing or eliminating environmentally and economically
damaging subsidies and internalizing environmental costs in market prices;

- Promote technologies that are critical for increasing access to basic services, in
particular water, sanitation and energy, in an integrated manner and in addition to
eco-efficient resource use.

Institutional framework for sustainable development

22. The core of sustainable development lies in the coordinated development of the
three pillars of economic development, social progress and environmental protection. An
institutional framework for sustainable development must be centred on ensuring that
these three pillars are addressed in a balanced manner.

23. The international community needs to commit to a meaningful strengthening of
governance in all three pillars and to make improving the integration of the three pillars
of sustainable development into policymaking a priority.

24. Any reforms will need to focus on improving the functioning of governance
structures in this regard on all levels?local, subnational, national, subregional, regional
and global. Furthermore, reforms should also provide for the engagement of member
States and with United Nations agencies to ensure the strategic direction and national
implementation of outcomes as well as open and inclusive mechanisms for engaging all
stakeholders, in particular the most disadvantaged populations, women and youth, in
decision-making processes.

25. The United Nations should continue to play a leading role in advancing the
progress of sustainable development and in providing technical and capacity-
development support to developing countries. Better coordination among the United
Nations agencies, programmes, funds and institutions needs to be ensured, following the
principle of Delivering as One, which will increase effective field and country
implementation. The role of regional commissions, as a key element of the regional
institutional framework for integrating the three pillars of sustainable development, as per
provisions of Agenda 21, needs to be further strengthened to effectively support the
implementation of regional and subregional sustainable development strategies and plans.

26. At the global level, international financial institutions will also need to review
their programmatic strategies to ensure the provision of better support to developing
countries for the implementation of sustainable development. Also at the global level,
Rio+20 should identify steps for reforming global governance for sustainable
development, including short-and medium-term actions. Options for strengthening the
United Nations Economic and Social Council and/or establishing a Sustainable
Development Council should be considered. The role of any Sustainable Development
Council should be to enhance the monitoring of the progress of sustainable development.
To make any Sustainable Development Council that might be established as a result of
Rio+20 more effective and inclusive, an advisory body consisting of major groups?
representatives, including women and youth, and the scientific community could be
established. Such a structure would need to be duplicated at the national level to allow for
the effective implementation of sustainable development.

27. Any institutional reform needs to ensure that environmental governance is also
strengthened to eliminate the segregation of the environment pillar from the economic
and social pillars and to cater for the proliferation of the multilateral environmental
agreements. Universal membership and predictable funding for UNEP would be
important in the short run. Some interventions noted that the international community
needs to review the options and/or support for further strengthening and elevating the
status of UNEP to a global environment organization while others were against this
proposal.

Partnerships for sustainable development

28. Global, regional and subregional partnerships proved to be successful mechanisms
for a more inclusive approach to the implementation of sustainable development after the
World Summit for Sustainable Development in 2002. Forming regional and inter-
regional partnerships to provide support for developing capacity, enhancing
policymaking and decision-making processes and increasing awareness were emphasized
as effective means for implementing, financing and transferring technology.

29. Delegates also proposed the following partnerships for sustainable development as
regional contributions to Rio+20 outcomes:

- Astana Green Bridge Initiative: Europe-Asia-Pacific Partnership for
Implementation of Green Growth (Kazakhstan). The Green Bridge Partnership
Programme developed under this initiative requires a multilateral, long-term
partnership, a more stable basis for green investments and a technology transfer
mechanism for green technologies and innovations. The programme will be able to
ensure free assistance and advice to countries and institutions on new technologies
or innovation and also use other countries? experiences in to help to reform
policies to attract green investment. The Government of Kazakhstan welcomed the
participation of member States of the Europe and Asia-Pacific regions to share
their experiences, lessons learned and best practices.

- Eco-city development as reflected in the Future City (Japan). The future mega-
cities in Asia need to be designed and developed in a sustainable manner to
maximize the benefits of low-carbon technologies and waste management.

- Initiative to Cultivate Sustainable Citizens (Japan). The development of human
resources in Asia and the Pacific is the key to implementing sustainable
development.

Annex II

Seoul Outcome

The Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United Nations Conference
on Sustainable Development

19-20 October 2011, Seoul, Republic of Korea

1. The participants of the Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development met in Seoul, Republic of
Korea on 19-20 October 2011.

2. Recognizing that the Asia and Pacific region is one of the most diverse regional
groupings, characterized by high economic growth rates while being home to the
largest number of the world?s poor,

3. Further recognizing that the diverse range of States in the region, including but not
limited to Small Island Developing States, high-mountain States and land-locked
States, continues to face many special and particular vulnerabilities,

4. Reaffirming the principles contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development Agenda 21, as well as the instruments further adopted for the
implementation of Agenda 21, in particular the Johannesburg Plan of
Implementation,

5. Also reaffirming that the main objective of the United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development (Rio+20) is to secure renewed political commitment for
sustainable development, assessing progress to date and the remaining gaps in the
implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development
and addressing new and emerging challenges,

6. The participants considered that the outcome of the Rio+20 conference should be:

- Based on the Rio Principles, including the principle of common but
differentiated responsibilities

- Action-oriented

- Forward-looking

- Consensus-based

- Inclusive

- Supportive of global partnerships for sustainable development.

7. Participants agreed that a green economy has to be seen in the context of the
overriding objectives of sustainable development and poverty eradication. The
green economy approach should take into account the principle of common but
differentiated responsibilities in particular, in the context of the Rio Principles. In
that regard: